Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
questions about the fight over the fiscal cliff and whether some media outlets are playing favorites. obama tries new negotiation tack. not giving in. the headline in the baltimore business journal screams obama's fiscal cliff offer spurned by republicans. obama takes hard line on debt. which might be news to some people in the parenthetical. tony is a political correspondent and mark hannah is a former aide to the john kerry and barack obama presidential campaigns. some of the media tries to short form the story and comes up with a headline that can be barbed easily. this is suggested by a cable anchor who suggested the media has been arrogant since barack obama won in covering him and in covering in particular this fiscal cliff. tony, your thoughts. >> it could only be an msnbc anchor to take this long to figure out. there have been some media, the financial times which endorsed the president has called the president's bluff on this plan. they say this is the same proposal he put in front of congress that received zero votes a year ago, not even one democratic vote. but what the media has
. it gives republicans leverage. president obama has the leverage in the fiscal cliff fight. he's willing to let the tax go up on the middle class. on the debt increase he doesn't have the same leverage. bob woodward pointed out that tim geithner said to president obama if the republicans stick to their guns on the debt limit bill you cannot reto it. the consequences will be so clam to us that you cannot veto it. so obama would have capitulated. megyn: that's what simon is saying now. that we shouldn't put the country in that position. >> the only way we'll get action on this debt. we keep spending and spending and raising our debt by $6 trillion every obama term. that's what catastrophic. the republicans need to stick to the boehner rule. a dollar of spending cuts for every dollar in spending increases. why give in on taxes and the fiscal cliff fight when you will have all the leverage. megyn: simon? >> in the rasmussen poll that came out today the republicans lost 10 points since the election in the congressional generic fight. they are losing this economic argument right now. if they p
's very clear, i think at least, that the democrats want to go off the fiscal cliff. you can see it in the fact that president obama's out there campaigning instead of sitting down with john boehner, running around pushing for a bill to increase -- extend just the middle class tax cuts which he knows republicans will never do. you can see it in the fact that 33 senate democrats signed this letter which says, quote, we will oppose including social security cuts for current or future pen fisheries in any -- beneficiaries at any time. that's signed by harry reid. senator durbin giving a speech saying no touching medicare or medicaid in any year end package. so, basically, the democratic position is no changes to social security, no changes to medicare, no changes to medicaid, yet the mainstream media all you hear is three words: grover, grover, grover. all you hear is about republican intransigence on taxes. where are the stories about democratic intransigence on entitlements? it seems to me that what they want to do is go off the fiscal cliff, pocket the increase on the wealthy, th
effort to demonize the rich. we have seen it through president obama's approach. you see it now to his approach on the fiscal cliff about wealth distribution and esop with occupy wall street, which was supported by the unions and by the global socialist movement. it is not just happening here, it is a global movement to the left. so again, this is a part of this megyn: they seem to be trying to say that the rich, and maybe that is banks and what have you -- they say that they got us into this mess and they are saying that jurors and their pensions and blame us. to make 60 or $70,000 per year. which is a decent living in some places but not rich. and it's not fair. that's what they're trying to say. don't buy the narrative that it's all about us and our pensions that it is not fair. teacher actually works without him, and pays 20 or 30% tax. where as somebody who is earning the money from capital gains, which is assets that they may have worked four years ago, is paying 13.9%. that strikes people as unfair. what the are saying is that we should at least have a fair share of taxes being
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)